Marian Schedenig

Varese. And since I don't know anything by Varese, I have no idea if her comment makes sense.

I'm confidently excited for this film.

[Wrong thread]

1. That's horrible. 2. That sounds like the perfect premise for the next spin-off series.

Here's a link: https://www.instagram.com/p/C55-MG-OREE/?img_index=5

It seems to me that was at least partly her point though. If there were plenty of other films with such a setting, I imagine she wouldn't object to one of them vilifying its subject. That's what I said myself, and why I don't think it's a valid reason to generally condemn the film. But like Tom managed to phrase more concisely than I did above, I think her POV can be understood. It's a quote copied from Wikipedia, which likely took it from a longer source (and interview I would imagine). I don't expect it has the full context, and I would expect (but I obviously don't know) that if you were to talk to her about it, she would elaborate in more detail what specifically she objected to and what she (maybe/I imagine) didn't.

I don't think it's an implied general unacceptability, and Alsop's objection may be stronger than it "needs" to be. But as long as it is virtually the *only* film centred on a world-famous, female, lesbian conductor, it's arguably at this point that *every* film with such a character is portraying it as a villain - and I think that's what her phrasing implies ("To have an opportunity to portray a woman in that role and to make her an abuser", emphasis mine). So I do think she has a point, even if it isn't one that has to be shared by everyone. Rejecting it as entirely reprehensible seems about as extreme to me as generally rejecting the film because of her view on it.

Good. I've been meaning to revisit Berlin anyway. After three concerts in a row, I doubt he'll immediately go on another "tour" concert. I can totally imagine him also doing London and/or Vienna next year at this point, but I would expect that to be a separate trip. Perhaps he's reserving that for Vienna…

I didn't see Tár (primarily) as a relatable tragic character. She's too close to real life examples of conductors who were horrible tyrants, even if (perhaps even because of that) they produced great artistic results. Someone like Alsop probably had to contend with people like that throughout her career to become successful, maybe even had to oppose them, or maybe even oppose using their method herself (surely male conductors at least can get a career advantage out of at least some of that stuff, as long as they're artistically convincing enough and have enough people on their side). Tár is a character remarkably similar to Alsop in some aspects who probably behaves very much in a way that many people she encountered in reality do and in which she herself probably very deliberately doesn't. That doesn't necessarily make the film "wrong". But she has a point - at the very least a subjective, but valid one. How the film portrays this behaviour seems mostly very accurate. It's quite uncomfortably successful in that regard.

Maybe it wouldn't have to be a wall to wall score. It probably needs fewer busy action sequences than Indy, too. And I'm sure Spielberg would accommodate Williams and plan for his scoring habits along with editing. Provided Williams is healthy and wants to do it, of course.

Marin Alsop didn't like it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tár I didn't think it was "anti-woman". Comments have been made that making the lead character male would have been a cliche, and perhaps there's some truth to that - but is it really cliche just because it's so often the truth? I don't think the film suggests a specific connection between Tár being a female, or a lesbian, and her abuse of power. But given the still heavily male dominated field and the similarities between Alsop and the film's character, it's not really surprising that she takes it somewhat personal. Interesting point.

Much of it seemed believable, or even familiar. And then other parts felt like someone overshot by a dozen namedrops and ended up cliched instead of authentic (possibly without being aware of it). But then I don't think I fully grasped the film, so my perception may be off.

I felt it walked the fine line between authenticity and random name/technical term dropping very wobblily. But yes, always nice to see Glover.

I finally watched this a while ago after looking forward to it for a long time. I must say I didn't know what to think of it once it was over (and still don't). Blanchett's performance was very strong, but probably not among my favourites of hers, subjectively.

I'm confused now.